KELLER, P.J., delivered the opinion of the Court in which YEARY, KEEL, SLAUGHTER and MCCLURE, JJ., joined. HERVEY, RICHARDSON and NEWELL, JJ., concurred. WALKER, J., dissented. We consider how to proceed when a defendant timely expresses a wish to appeal, no notice of appeal is filed, and the trial court’s certification says that there is no right to appeal because the conviction is the result of a plea agreement. Because a defendant in that situation had no right to appeal, he suffers no prejudice even if counsel performed deficiently in failing to file a notice of appeal. Although the Supreme Court has concluded that a presumption of prejudice applies when a defendant waives an appeal, this case concerns a certification showing no right to appeal rather than mere waiver of appeal. Although a waiver might not completely extinguish every possible appellate claim, a person in Applicant’s situation has extinguished every possible appellate claim. RELEVANT STATUTES AND RULES There is no federal or Texas constitutional right to appeal a criminal conviction; any right to appeal is conferred solely by statute.[1] In Texas, a defendant who pleads guilty pursuant to a plea bargain that the trial court follows has no statutory right to appeal, except as to matters raised in writing before trial, when the trial court gives permission to appeal, or in certain cases involving appeals from justice or municipal courts (specified in a different statute).[2] In line with statute, the applicable appellate rule provides only three situations in which an appeal is allowed in a plea- bargain case: (A) those matters that were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, (B) after getting the trial court’s permission to appeal, or (C) where the specific appeal is expressly authorized by statute.[3] We have held that those situations are exclusive; in any other situation, no appeal is authorized, even when the challenge is jurisdictional or is to the voluntariness of the plea.[4] BACKGROUND Applicant pled guilty pursuant to a plea bargain. The trial court’s certification form in this case displays five checkboxes detailing five options regarding the right of appeal. Two options are checked, saying that the case “is a plea bargain case and the defendant has NO right of appeal” and that “the defendant has waived the right of appeal.” Left blank are the following options: the case “is not a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has the right of appeal,” the case “is a plea-bargain case, but matters were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial and not withdrawn or waived, and the defendant has the right of appeal,” and the case “is a plea-bargain case, but the trial court has given permission to appeal, and the defendant has the right of appeal.” Applicant and his trial attorney signed the certification form. No notice of appeal was filed.[5] In this habeas application, Applicant contends, as pertinent here, that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to file a notice of appeal. Trial counsel responded that on the day of Applicant’s plea, Applicant’s mother sent a message saying that Applicant wanted to appeal. Counsel said he emailed the trial court and asked that appellate counsel be appointed because trial counsel did not handle appeals. In its findings, the habeas court agreed with trial counsel’s recitation of events. The court further found that, although trial counsel requested the appointment of appellate counsel, he did not file a notice of appeal. The court also found that Applicant would have timely filed a notice of appeal but for counsel’s mistaken belief that his email notification to the court would suffice to protect Applicant’s right to appeal.[6] ANALYSIS Under Garza v. Idaho, even when a defendant has waived appeal, his attorney has a duty to file a notice of appeal if the defendant so requests, and there is a presumption of prejudice if the notice is not filed.[7] The Supreme Court explicitly based this presumption of prejudice on the fact that “no appeal waiver serves as an absolute bar to all appellate claims.”[8] On the certification form in Applicant’s case, one of the options checked is that Applicant waived his right to appeal. If that were the only option checked, then Garza would control. But there is another reason that Applicant cannot appeal in this case. This is not a case where Applicant had a right to appeal and waived it. He did not in fact have a right to appeal to begin with. In conformity with the appellate rules, the certification form set out five options.[9] One of the options selected on Applicant’s certification form was that the case was a plea-bargain case and Applicant had no right of appeal. The pretrial-motions and permission-to-appeal options were not selected on Applicant’s form, so those two statutory bases for appealing in a plea-bargain case are not at issue. This case does not involve an appeal from a justice or municipal court, and we know of no statute that would authorize Applicant’s appeal despite the plea-bargain status of the case, so situation (C) in the appellate rules does not apply. Consequently, the statement in Applicant’s certification form that he has no right of appeal reflects that Applicant had no right to appeal any issue in the case. Although Applicant purported to waive a right to appeal, he in fact had no right to appeal to waive. Even though a waiver is not an absolute bar to all possible claims when a defendant waives a right to appeal that he would otherwise have had, Applicant’s situation is different because he never had a right to appeal to begin with. Because he does not fit within any of the narrow situations that allow appeals by plea-bargaining defendants, he never had a right to appeal at all and, consequently, all possible appellate claims were barred in his case. Importantly, Applicant was still represented by trial counsel when the certification form was created. Trial counsel signed it and Applicant himself signed it. The certification confirms that Applicant had no statutory right to appeal. Because the certification shows an absolute bar to all appellate claims in Applicant’s case, his attorney’s failure to file a notice of appeal did not prejudice him. Finding no meritorious claims,[10] we deny relief. Delivered: October 12, 2022 Publish
